321–330 of 385 posts
I have Windows 7 on the other partition mainly to play games.
There was a minor issue with Ubuntu trying to melt the CPU in my laptop the other day, but its not so bad since I upgraded, and I found this powertop thing that also helps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you, that's exactly how I think, it's even this way with Windows. On other systems I would waste days after days of my life to set things up 'just the way I want' only to find that it's never gonna be quite that way. Macs just let me accept the things as they are and get back to work. Very often, I'd get to see after a while, why things work the way they work (say, Window management). Anyway, this has been almo…
>On other systems I would waste days after days of my life to set things up 'just the way I want' only to find that it's never gonna be quite that way. Macs just let me accept the things as they are and get back to work. This. It's almost as if Linux is a collection of parts and tools from which a sufficiently good designer can build a usable desktop whereas OS X is a usable desktop. That's an exaggeration, but for m…
This has been highly successful, only I'm afraid that the Unix people inside Apple are loosing influence. The sandboxing in ML looks like a mess to me. Not that its a bad idea per se, but look what it did to our beautiful '~/Library/[ApplicationSupport|Preferences]'! It's tacked on and it's obvious that this has been a political decision from management rather than engineering. Makes me angry.
On a different note: I've never really used it extensively because I switched to macs in '05, but wasn't Ubuntu pretty close before they switched to Unity? I remember last time I installed it that for the first time I could have a Linux that worked out of the box, including network and graphics drivers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it is not Unix.
If Unix is what you want, you shouldn't be using a system that isn't Unix (or Unix-like in the case of Linux). However, there's still Cygwin which is reasonably good.
Well, I use msys and eshell instead, which I find less jarring.
I more or less disagree. My main frustration with Linux For Personal Use is that I can't buy a piece of hardware that I know won't regress with new versions of a distribution for three plus years or get any service if it does. My reference for the importance of this is a perfectly usable 2008 refurbished Macbook. I upgraded the RAM once recently for a bit more snap, but otherwise have no complaints over the three or…
I don't even know what that would look like. Does anyone else?
Maybe a registered farm of devices that test distribution release candidates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not an issue with Apple or Samsung, it's an Android decision. Support for the USB Mass Storage protocol has been deprecated in Android in favor of MTP (Media Transfer Protocol) starting with Ice Cream Sandwich. The experience in Windows and on Linux is just as poor with this phone. (I love the phone, though.)
Why can't Apple support MTP? Linux gets cited for lack of hardware or protocol support (MTP to an Android device works fine in Linux, btw), but it's not Apple's fault when they can't or don't provide drivers for common, standardized consumer electronics?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To stress out again; OS/X has the poorest hardware support for 3rd parties; even compared to Linux. Just "think different" and buy some hardware and you ll see what I mean..
I've been using OS X going back to the betas. I've never seen OS X have problems with third party hardware that conformed to standards. I have seen problems with third party hardware that required its own driver (poorly written generally) or that was half assed crap that was designed to work with windows but marketed as supporting standards like "USB". Meanwhile, Linux has trouble dealing with the computer itself, le…
The problem is that hardware often doesn't really conform to standards, even those it claims to.
One of the reasons device support in Linux (and other OSes which target a wide range of platforms) is difficult, is that it's necessary in practice to cope with and have workarounds for buggy and out-of-spec hardware and firmware. Just "coding to the standard" isn't good enough.
Such buggy hardware/firmware is rarely documented as such, and finding these problems and the appropriate way to handle them is painful and difficult work. In some cases the only practical way to figure out what actually works is to reverse-engineer what Windows does (the hardware manufacturers generally make sure that Windows works with their hardware, but rarely make such information public).
Apple's main goal is their own hardware, over which they obviously have a lot of control and information, so they really don't need to worry so much about this.
I was kind of hoping those two things would each help drive the other forward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh my This is 100% to blame on Samsung, sorry. Even though my Samsung phone is seen as a USB device (and it works on MAC OS X), but maybe in the newer models they removed this functionality (and called it a feature) People may complain that iPhones need iTunes but then again it's iTunes not the gigantic pile of crap that is Kies
No it has nothing to do with Samsung. In ICE Google changed how the partitions are handled: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11714077&... It was pure engineering tradeoff to improve things in the long term. If anything OEMs would have preferred the old 'just works', sub-optimal, gives-an-excuse-to-obsolete-a-phone, lower support issues, solution. The ball is now in operating systems' court to support th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To stress out again; OS/X has the poorest hardware support for 3rd parties; even compared to Linux. Just "think different" and buy some hardware and you ll see what I mean..
I've been using OS X going back to the betas. I've never seen OS X have problems with third party hardware that conformed to standards. I have seen problems with third party hardware that required its own driver (poorly written generally) or that was half assed crap that was designed to work with windows but marketed as supporting standards like "USB". Meanwhile, Linux has trouble dealing with the computer itself, le…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's my point. It's not that a lot of people like it. In fact, whether people like it or not isn't really relevant. It's that this is the correct way to do it. When the menu bar is at the top of the screen, the user is much faster at getting the mouse over a menu item and clicking to open the menu. It works better. This isn't opinion, it's measurable scientifically. When the menu is on a window, you overshoot with…
It is absolutely opinion. For a start, it precludes a sane implementation of focus-follows-mouse. Secondly, for frequently used commands, keyboard shortcuts will be faster anyway (I'm aware of the study you're probably going to mention, but plenty of other studies have had different conclusions). Lastly, and this is pure conjecture on my part, wouldn't having the menu bar at the top of the screen result in a much nar…
Particularly since the top left option (in the easy-to-hit corner) isn't usually one that you want to access much in the use of a program. Sure, you can get your mouse in the vicinity, but you still have to hunt for the menu you actually want. If your screen(s) is large enough that this requires moving your head (or even your eyes significantly), it rapidly eats up any trivial advantage you gain from 'knowing where the menu bar is'.